Saudi Arabia Oil Turn & The COVID-19 Pandemic

[august948]

3 hours ago, West Timer said:

It's a talent. Don't be jealous. 😎

 

Let not your heart be troubled on that score.

[West Timer]

11 hours ago, august948 said:

 

Let not your heart be troubled on that score.

😎 Whatev bro. Just stay heathy and try not to hoard too much "hoax" soap.✌️

 

[samagon]

17 hours ago, jgriff said:

There comes a point when the solution is worse than the problem. I’m starting to think 2% of the population dying might be a sacrifice we should make. After another month of this we might be very close to social unrest caused by economic issues, not medical ones.

 

I sincerely doubt this will happen. 

 

2 reasons,

 

there are some very promising reports of therapeutic remedies. France has cleared the use of the malaria drug for use after 78 of 80 people treated with it got better in 5 days, as opposed to the typical 14 or longer days.  https://www.dailywire.com/news/france-officially-sanctions-drug-after-78-of-80-patients-recover-from-covid-19-within-five-days

 

the other is that you look at countries like Japan, HK and SIngapore that should be just as devastated as the rest of us, but clearly they are on a much more linear infection rate compared to the almost E^N infection rate everywhere else sees. the difference is that their society already wears masks pretty much all the time.

 

 

there are some reports I've read today that say that 50% of the people infected will never show any symptoms, but will be able to transmit the virus (I've read so much on this up to this point I can't remember where I read that, or where the article was). the point is, wear masks to reduce the risk to the rest of society if you are an unknowing carrier.

 

sure there are other factors in mitigating the spread in those countries, but if someone said to you, you can go about your lives as normal IF you wear a mask, otherwise, you stay at home. it's the responsible thing to do right now. I'm sure a lot of people would be happy to oblige, especially if there were some drugs that could be administered that reduced the severity/longevity of this.

 

check the graph on this page, and select Texas. https://covid19.healthdata.org/projections

 

they project that we have 5 weeks in Texas before we hit the maximum cases using our current protocols.

 

considering we are realistically staring at another 5 weeks of lockdown style approach (and we're only through 2 weeks up to now), if either/both of these things happened, and we could get back to our typical (with modifications) routine, that would be awesome.

 

but yeah, it is going to take a lot of bank forgiveness/leniency to every level of loan, and a lot of landlord forgiveness/leniency to every level of lease agreement, and hundreds of other things to keep this from spiraling out of control in a bad way. I seem to believe that society will come together to do what's right to keep society intact.

 

at the end of the day, I'm scared for friends that owe rent, I'm scared for my wife who might lose her job, I'm scared for my parents who are in the extremely vulnerable group, I'm scared for myself. I grieve for my friends that have already lost friends and family to this virus. 

 

this is a shitshow that will absolutely effect every single one of us in a way that we probably don't want to even imagine right now. 

 

as a society though, we have to stay positive, and work towards the best. help those you can help, and at the least, do your part to prevent the spread of this deadly virus.

Edited April 1, 2020 by samagon

[mkultra25]

17 hours ago, jgriff said:

There comes a point when the solution is worse than the problem. I’m starting to think 2% of the population dying might be a sacrifice we should make. After another month of this we might be very close to social unrest caused by economic issues, not medical ones.

 

The population of the US is roughly 325,000,000. 2% of that is 6,500,000.

 

I am neither a straight-ticket voter nor a Sandernista, but the fact that this and similar viewpoints appear to have gained traction on social media platforms over the past few days as something to be seriously considered leads me to believe that, if anything, we are long overdue for "social unrest caused by economic issues".

[Houston19514]

The point isn't to sacrifice x% of people merely to avoid economic harm. The point is that, at a certain point, economic harm is also bad for society's health and could in fact cause more deaths than the x% being "sacrificed".

[samagon]

1 hour ago, mkultra25 said:

 

The population of the US is roughly 325,000,000. 2% of that is 6,500,000.

 

I am neither a straight-ticket voter nor a Sandernista, but the fact that this and similar viewpoints appear to have gained traction on social media platforms over the past few days as something to be seriously considered leads me to believe that, if anything, we are long overdue for "social unrest caused by economic issues".

 

yeah, I don't think anyone that says these things actually think through what would actually happen in that scenario. the speed with which this virus can infect a population is nothing short of astonishing.

 

when you look at numbers from such a sanitary distance it's hard to put contextualize the reality of what you are suggesting.

 

put those numbers in Houston metro area, if the population of the greater Houston area is 6 million. 120,000 people would die this year in Houston alone.

 

if there are 50 people that work at your office, 1 of them is going to die. and it's probably not going to be the young aggressive sales guy no one likes, it will be the super nice lady who is about a year from retirement that does random admin tasks.

 

the reality is that it hits older people harder. I think the stats are that if you are over 70 there is a 1 in 7 chance of not surviving? those odds are for shit, maybe the people who want to just let this thing run its course can figure out a way to have this virus target their parents rather than mine?

[samagon]

7 minutes ago, Houston19514 said:

The point isn't to sacrifice x% of people merely to avoid economic harm. The point is that, at a certain point, economic harm is also bad for society's health and could in fact cause more deaths than the x% being "sacrificed".

 

this I can see, but I absolutely believe that there will not need to be a choice between civil unrest (and the resultant deaths), or back to business as usual (and the resultant deaths).

 

I am pretty sure that as we continue through this month the sobering reality of how many people will be affected by this virus will help calm anyone leaning towards civil unrest.

 

and there will continue to be medical discoveries of medications found to keep people out of hospitals and keep them from dying (which will allow us to all go back to work without 1 out of 50 people dying).

[Houston19514]

1 hour ago, samagon said:

 

this I can see, but I absolutely believe that there will not need to be a choice between civil unrest (and the resultant deaths), or back to business as usual (and the resultant deaths).

 

I am pretty sure that as we continue through this month the sobering reality of how many people will be affected by this virus will help calm anyone leaning towards civil unrest.

 

and there will continue to be medical discoveries of medications found to keep people out of hospitals and keep them from dying (which will allow us to all go back to work without 1 out of 50 people dying).

 

Just to be clear, the harms to health that can be expected to arise from an economic shutdown (or massive slowdown) are not due to civil unrest. It's about the million little things that would not longer be economically viable...  money no longer available to invest in medical care, medical research, better building standards (there's a reason wealthier societies generally suffer fewer casualties from earthquakes, hurricanes, etc.), better food production and distribution . . . Not to mention the fact that, without jobs (and income), it's kinda hard for people to buy food, shelter, medicine, and healthcare.

 

Indeed, we hope there will continue to be medical discoveries, but without an economy to support that research and production...

Edited April 1, 2020 by Houston19514

[samagon]

18 minutes ago, Houston19514 said:

 

Just to be clear, the harms to health that can be expected to arise from an economic shutdown (or massive slowdown) are not due to civil unrest. It's about the million little things that would not longer be economically viable...  money no longer available to invest in medical care, medical research, better building standards (there's a reason wealthier societies generally suffer fewer casualties from earthquakes, hurricanes, etc.), better food production and distribution . . .

 

Indeed, we hope there will continue to be medical discoveries, but without an economy to support that research and production...

 

I don't see that as even a remotely possible outcome.

 

This great Nation will endure as it has endured, will revive and will prosper. 

 

that is a quote from Franklin Roosevelt's inauguration speech in 1933. While Trump (and any of his challengers) is no where near as capable as he was, the message is still true. we've got car companies gearing up to make ventilators. we've got DIYers 3d printing PPE, this nation is banding together to survive, through the worst of this (and it is still yet to come), we will see the best of humanity come to the top.

[Houston19514]

2 hours ago, samagon said:

 

I don't see that as even a remotely possible outcome.

 

This great Nation will endure as it has endured, will revive and will prosper. 

 

that is a quote from Franklin Roosevelt's inauguration speech in 1933. While Trump (and any of his challengers) is no where near as capable as he was, the message is still true. we've got car companies gearing up to make ventilators. we've got DIYers 3d printing PPE, this nation is banding together to survive, through the worst of this (and it is still yet to come), we will see the best of humanity come to the top.

 

A massive economic slowdown is not a remotely possible outcome????   It's already happening.  At the margins (which is where everything happens), there are already millions of people whose future health outlooks are diminished as a result of the shutdowns, and millions more to come.  As a society, we will in fact be less prosperous and therefore have reduced health outlooks.  I don't pretend to know where the crossover point is, but it's a discussion that should be had, openly and honestly, without hyperbolic claims that to have the discussion means you want to sacrifice 2% of our population or all old people.

Edited April 2, 2020 by Houston19514

[samagon]

1 hour ago, Houston19514 said:

 

A massive economic slowdown is not a remotely possible outcome????   It's already happening.  At the margins (which is where everything happens), there are already millions of people whose future health outlooks are diminished as a result of the shutdowns, and millions more to come.  As a society, we will in fact be less prosperous and therefore have reduced health outlooks.  I don't pretend to know where the crossover point is, but it's a discussion that should be had, openly and honestly, without hyperbolic claims that to have the discussion means you want to sacrifice 2% of our population or all old people.

 

massive economic slowdown, sure, we're headed to that direction.

 

massive economic slowdown that results in more than 6.5 million people dying? not even remotely likely.

[West Timer]

If you want to guarantee civil unrest, make it the official policy that from this point forward we are going to do nothing to treat or stop the spread of C-19. 

 

 

 

Edited April 2, 2020 by West Timer

[samagon]

week before last 3.3 million people filed for unemployment, last week it was 6.6.

 

I'm sure this will grow when this week's numbers come in.

 

edit: link with no paywall

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-04-02/u-s-jobless-claims-doubled-to-record-6-65-million-last-week

 

so 10 million total jobless as of now.

Edited April 2, 2020 by samagon

[West Timer]

What government? 

[Geographer]

Does anyone remember the refusal of a single Republican senator to vote for an $800 billion stimulus package during the Great Recession because they said the nation couldn't afford it?  Where are those senators now? 

 

A silver lining from this crisis will be the end of the Tea Party.  Reagan's idea that the government does more harm than good will be discredited.  This crisis has shown that a strong, professional, competent government is necessary to address public health emergencies and prevent mass unemployment and social unrest.  Massive Federal spending now and for the coming months is the only way to prevent rampant unemployment, despair, and homelessness.  Don't forget that most people receive their health insurance from their jobs, so if they lose their jobs they lose their health insurance, all during a pandemic.

[gmac]

37 minutes ago, Geographer said:

This crisis has shown that a strong, professional, competent government is necessary to address public health emergencies and prevent mass unemployment and social unrest.

 

Let me know when you find one of these unicorns.

[Geographer]

2 hours ago, gmac said:

Let me know when you find one of these unicorns.

How about Taiwan, South Korea, Japan, Australia, and Germany?  They are liberal democracies that have gotten a handle on the pandemic in their countries.  Your attitude is indicative of the Tea Partiers -- the government can never be professional or competent so why even try?  Why even try to fund programs that help society?  It's a convenient attitude for rich people who want an excuse to lower their taxes and defund government programs.  It's an attitude that is totally wrong and one reason the coronavirus is ravaging this country.  The Trump administration and many state governments refused, and continue to refuse to learn from South Korea and Taiwan.

Edited April 2, 2020 by Geographer

[samagon]

2 hours ago, Geographer said:

Don't forget that most people receive their health insurance from their jobs, so if they lose their jobs they lose their health insurance, all during a pandemic.

 

well, there is cobra insurance. someone that loses a job has access to insurance for a period of time after they lose their job. anyone that chooses to not take cobra insurance right now is making a bad choice.

 

but then again, if it's a question of food vs insurance, you can guess what people are going to select. 😕

 

[gmac]

1 hour ago, Geographer said:

How about Taiwan, South Korea, Japan, Australia, and Germany?  They are liberal democracies that have gotten a handle on the pandemic in their countries.  Your attitude is indicative of the Tea Partiers -- the government can never be professional or competent so why even try?  Why even try to fund programs that help society?  It's a convenient attitude for rich people who want an excuse to lower their taxes and defund government programs.  It's an attitude that is totally wrong and one reason the coronavirus is ravaging this country.  The Trump administration and many state governments refused, and continue to refuse to learn from South Korea and Taiwan.

You sure read a lot into what I posted, without knowing anything about me.

 

Seems like you might have an agenda.

[Luminare]

8 hours ago, cspwal said:

Nitpicky sidenote - this thread's title is "Coronoavirus Delays" but it's spelled "Coronavirus" also I've ordered out more in the past 3 weeks than I feel like I did all of the rest of the year

 

easy way to remember is to just imagine Trump saying it which is hilarious. Each time he says it its like the word was dubbed. "Corona...virus."

[Luminare]

 

[Montrose1100]

I see a lot of discussion about civil unrest due to job loss. None related to the daily corruption of government officials who can get away with stealing millions scot-free. The bonus is they already sacrificed lives when they had the intel but decided not to act.

[Houston19514]

On 4/1/2020 at 9:23 PM, samagon said:

 

massive economic slowdown, sure, we're headed to that direction.

 

massive economic slowdown that results in more than 6.5 million people dying? not even remotely likely.

 

It's really not that simple.  First, everyone dies.  The analysis has to consider how much earlier people die than they otherwise would have.  I read recently that a substantial number of corona virus deaths are elderly or otherwise-compromised people who likely would have died within a year even without the virus.  The analysis has to consider that, along with the possibility that in the long run, many millions of people might have shorter life spans as a result of the lower prosperity caused by the economic shutdown.

 

Plus, there remains the unanswered question of exactly what is expected to be accomplished by the economic shut-down.  Flattening the curve does not necessarily mean fewer deaths from the virus.  It just spreads them out further.

Edited April 3, 2020 by Houston19514

[samagon]

1 hour ago, Houston19514 said:

 

Plus, there remains the unanswered question of exactly what is expected to be accomplished by the economic shut-down.  Flattening the curve does not necessarily mean fewer deaths from the virus.  It just spreads them out further.

 

'flattening the curve' simply means we slow the rate of infection.

 

unabated this thing will spread at a rate that the number of patients that need hospital care cannot receive it because they are overloaded. so yes, when you start doing the triage they are doing in Italy where they are sending people home to die if they are over a certain age, and may only receive help if they are more likely to survive there are going to be higher deaths.

 

I grant that there are studies that a lot of people that end up on ventilators as a result of this do not recover https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2020/04/02/826105278/ventilators-are-no-panacea-for-critically-ill-covid-19-patients but I can find no information that says other patients that need hospital care are just as likely to survive as those that need hospital care but can't receive it because there is no room.

 

I encourage you to review the data on this site:

https://covid19.healthdata.org/projections

 

it shows (based on the current accepted statistics of infection rates, hospitalization rates, and respirator rates) what the current curve looks like, how many hospital beds will be needed at the height of the curve, and how many are available. This doesn't take into consideration the use of 'field hospitals' aka, turning GRB into a giant field hospital to provide care.

 

so absolutely, flattening the curve will result in a less overwhelmed system. 

 

the bleakest outlook is that no matter what we do, the people who reach a certain level will die regardless of the care they receive. even still, flattening the curve and dragging this out will likely save lives. therapies such as the malaria drug (which as I've linked above) show promise. it's not like there's just tons of it sitting around, if everyone gets sick at the same time, you run out of drugs that show to work to make even the worst cases recover. pharmaceutical companies need time to create these drugs. pushing the timeline out also gives doctors and scientists a chance to find other drugs that might be helpful to keep those infected healthy enough to not only to not need ventilators, but to fully recover. there will come a time when there is a therapeutic drug (or drugs) that can be manufactured quick enough, and have a high enough success rate that we will be able to go back to work, school, restaurants, etc. even without a vaccine.

 

so yes, every indication is that flattening the curve will indeed save lives, even if all it does is slow the rate so it gives doctors and scientists a chance to come up with a solution. 

 

I totally see where you are coming from though, it absolutely sucks. Whiting petroleum just filed for bankruptcy yesterday, the first, and certainly not the last. there are countless restaurants that closed their doors a month ago and will never re-open. there are people losing jobs. this is temporary, it may be a really long temporary, but they will find new work, they will survive. it may come to pass that in 50 years some anthropologist may find that people that lived through this have a reduced life span, but that is a very solid maybe. and then that's facing off against other maybes that scientists and doctors are going to find something to save lives quick enough.

 

I don't think anyone knows the answers, but I think the right move is to follow the advice of everyone that has a lot more time and education of epidemiology and this virus than I do. right now, that advice is to do everything we can to slow down the spread of this virus.

Edited April 3, 2020 by samagon

[samagon]

2 hours ago, Montrose1100 said:

I see a lot of discussion about civil unrest due to job loss. None related to the daily corruption of government officials who can get away with stealing millions scot-free. The bonus is they already sacrificed lives when they had the intel but decided not to act.

 

omfg. these low lifes are clearly not in public office for the will of the people.

https://www.cnn.com/2020/03/29/politics/justice-stock-trades-lawmakers-coronavirus/index.html

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2020/4/1/21202900/kelly-loeffler-stock-sales-coronavirus-pandemic

https://www.democracynow.org/2020/3/20/headlines/at_least_five_us_senators_briefed_on_coronavirus_sold_stocks_before_market_crash

 

 

despicable is the nicest thing I can say.

[West Timer]

 

21 minutes ago, Houston19514 said:

 

It's really not that simple.  First, everyone dies.  The analysis has to consider how much earlier people die than they otherwise would have.  I read recently that a substantial number of corona virus deaths are elderly or otherwise-compromised people who likely would have died within a year even without the virus.  The analysis has to consider that, along with the possibility that in the long run, many millions of people might have significantly shorter life spans as a result of the lower prosperity caused by the economic shutdown.

 

https://www.usatoday.com/in-depth/news/nation/2020/04/03/coronavirus-poll-americans-saving-lives-economy-public-agenda/5098766002/

 

Saving the economy - 21%

Stopping the virus - 72%

 

Hard to imagine either party going against 72% of what the American people want in this election year.

 

[Highrise Tower]

Houston-based apartment co. launches $5M fund for residents without income due to coronavirus

https://www.bizjournals.com/houston/news/2020/04/02/houston-based-apartment-co-launches-5m-fund-for.html

Out-of-work residents living in one of Houston-based Camden Property Trust’s multifamily communities will soon have access to a new source of funds to help pay their bills.

Camden (NYSE: CPT) has launched a $5 million program to provide financial support to residents who lost their source of income as a result of the COVID-19 coronavirus pandemic.

Residents who can show coronavirus-related income losses are eligible for up to $2,000 per household under the Camden Cares Resident Relief Program.

Houston Mayor Sylvester Turner announced the program during an April 2 press conference.

Camden CEO Ric Campo told the Houston Business Journal his company launched the program as “a way to give back to the community and support our residents” during an unprecedented event, which has devastated many parts of the global economy.

Any resident living in one of Camden’s 165 properties nationwide is eligible for the program, Campo said. The funds, which are available on a first-come, first-served basis, will be considered a grant and are not required to be paid back, Campo said.

[samagon]

55 minutes ago, Highrise Tower said:

Houston-based apartment co. launches $5M fund for residents without income due to coronavirus

https://www.bizjournals.com/houston/news/2020/04/02/houston-based-apartment-co-launches-5m-fund-for.html

 

 

 

that is really awesome news.

 

$2000 isn't a lot on its own, but add it to the government check they're sending everyone, and add it to any potential unemployment benefits, and it can really start to help people that need just that little extra bit to get through this.

[Highrise Tower]

2020 Offshore Technology Conference now canceled after previously planning to postpone

https://www.bizjournals.com/houston/news/2020/04/02/2020offshore-technology-conference-now-canceled.html

 

Quote

 

It's official: The massive Offshore Technology Conference has been canceled for 2020.

 

Previously, organizers had hoped to postpone the event from its usual dates in early May until August or September. But as concerns about the COVID-19 coronavirus pandemic continue to grow, the OTC's board of directors decided canceling the 2020 event completely was the most feasible and responsible decision.

 

"As we navigate these difficult and uncertain times, it is with a heavy heart that the OTC Board of Directors has determined that it is in our best interest to cancel OTC 2020," OTC Chairperson Cindy Yeilding said in an April 2 press release. "Our priority is the health and safety of our attendees and exhibitors, and we have taken federal, state and local guidelines into account in making our decision."

 

However, technical papers and presentations related to the 2020 event will be available on OnePetro.org at a later date.

 

“On behalf of the OTC Board of Directors, we would like to thank the staff, authors, partners, volunteers, students, teachers and all involved with OTC for the dedication and hard work they have contributed to the 2020 event," Yeilding said. "As we face this uncharted territory, we remain confident of OTC’s critical role in the offshore industry’s future and eagerly anticipate a robust OTC 2021.”

 

Next year's event is scheduled for May 3-6, 2021, at NRG Park, and the call for papers will open on May 28, 2020.

 

 

[hindesky]

I can't seem to be able to find or buy any face masks, I've tried to buy some on Amazon 3 times and each time Amazon sends a email a couple days later canceling my orders.

Found this cool home made version to make.

During the Spanish Flu in 1918 people also wore masks.